|
|
Post by Patty Roy on Jun 3, 2004 18:01:52 GMT -5
Wes O'Neill, Johan Fransson, Oscar Hedman, Boris Valabik (big project) look like promising choices should they be around when the Habs pick. Cam Barker and Mike Green (BC's fave) won't be around. Too bad. So sad. It would be nice... Why are you so sure that Green won't be around at 18? Barker, sure...he won't escape the top 5, but i think that there is a legit chance that Green will still be available at 18. Green would probably be my pick at this point, over Valabik if both are still available at 18. I think that Barker and Thelen are probably the d-men that are sure to be gone by our pick, along with possibly Meszaros. But anythings possible...i have a feeling that this draft will be as full of suprises as any in recent memory... |
|
|
|
Post by M. Beaux-Eaux on Jun 3, 2004 18:33:06 GMT -5
Why are you so sure that Green won't be around at 18? Barker, sure...he won't escape the top 5, but i think that there is a legit chance that Green will still be available at 18. I'm not sure. I think it's most likely though Thelen would be a prize catch. And he has one of the characteristics that lights the fire of Savard's draft teams - a rising evaluation. Thelen went from 16th at mid-season to 11th at the end, among all NA skaters according to the CSS. Hmmm... Me too. After all, I can't remember a draft where as many as 4 goalies are being touted as first round picks. Should be fun. This jumbled field is exactly the type of territory that Savard and his team thrive in. It may be generally considered a weak draft but I think the Habs will do just fine. |
|
|
|
Post by NWTHabsFan on Jun 3, 2004 19:31:07 GMT -5
Should be fun. This jumbled field is exactly the type of territory that Savard and his team thrive in. It may be generally considered a weak draft but I think the Habs will do just fine. I agree. In addition to the shrewdness of AS, TT has quite the resume as well. 10 years with the Ottawa Sens who found a bunch of gems either late in the draft or during what many considered "weak" drafts for almost a decade. I don't mind that outlook at all. |
|
|
|
Post by Forum Ghost on Jun 4, 2004 1:06:58 GMT -5
With their first round pick, I would much rather have the Habs go for a defenceman instead of a forward or a goalie. Of course, you do want to take the best player available, but if that BPA comes down to a tie between a defenceman and a forward, I would prefer Savard and co. to go for the d-man. Out of our prospects, there seems to be more of a pressing need for quality defenceman than quality forwards.
As I mentioned earlier in this thread, Thelen would be the guy that I would covet the most. THN has him ranked at #15 so, judging by that, there is a chance that he might drop to the 18th spot. Of course, it is unlikely, but there's still a chance.
THN ranks Mike Green as a second rounder (32nd). There aren't too many publications on the draft out yet, so I'm basing everything on THN's list, but if Green is pegged as going 32nd, is it wise for the Habs to grab him with the 18th pick?
|
|
|
|
Post by M. Beaux-Eaux on Jun 4, 2004 8:11:29 GMT -5
From what Mizral writes, Robbie Schremp sound more like a deluxe version of Ribeiro than another Palffy. Comments from anyone who's seen him? As for Schremp I've seen him a few times myself, and I don't see Ribeiro really. Schremp to me is one of the most offensively skilled players in the draft. Great hands, flashy moves, stichandling, shot, passing. His skating is good but not great, his speed is good but not great, and there's been a lot of talk about him asking for a trade out of the Ice Dogs, not being picked for the U-20's (although they won the gold, so I guess they were right when they said they didn't need him) and his playoff performance this year. I can't say I like his attitude, as he came off as a cry baby when he wasn't picked for Team USA, but since I don't know the whole story I can't really say. What I have seen on the ice is impressive though. By Alan Adams | NHL.com columnist March 30, 2004 TORONTO -- Robbie Schremp is a lot of things. He can dazzle you with his offensive skills. He has Globetrotter-like puck-handling talent and he is more than capable of scoring a highlight reel goal. He sees the ice well and has good hockey sense, and when a scout whispers descriptions like this, the future bodes well for the player in question. And Schremp is not stupid. - www.nhl.com/futures/2004draft/schremp033004.html |
|
|
|
Post by BadCompany on Jun 4, 2004 8:13:35 GMT -5
You make Schremp sound better than Ribeiro except for his attitude. Is he really? I'm not a big Schremp fan at all. The Schremp horror list is a long one: * Walked out on the Mississauga Ice Dogs and demanded to be traded, either because: - he felt the owner of the team had lied to his older brother - he didn’t have any of his sticks ready to start a game * Went to the NTDP program, promised to play with them, then walked out a week later. * Flunked out of high school, calling school “an inconvenience.” Then tried to blame the school, saying they never sent him any homework. * Left off the US World Junior team, even after two players got hurt. The US is starting to get some depth, but not enough to leave off what some people are calling a Top 5 talent. * Benched for Game 7 of the OHL playoffs, a Game 7 his team lost. That’s a lot of baggage for a 17 year old. What happens when he actually starts making big money? Sounds like a prima donna to me. |
|
|
|
Post by BadCompany on Jun 4, 2004 8:17:42 GMT -5
Schremp likes being on the ice in the last minute of the game, either trying to get the equalizer or score the winner or protect a lead.
"Up one or down one, that is when the coach trusts you and that's when I want to be on the ice. You know your coach trusts you. But you should never push for points because once you start pushing, they won't come. I just play and let things happen."
Benched for Game 7 of the OHL playoffs and left off the team for the biggest show-case tournament for junior-aged players. Apparently at least a couple of coaches don't trust him...
|
|
|
|
Post by M. Beaux-Eaux on Jun 4, 2004 8:33:10 GMT -5
Yes, but he's special.
|
|
|
|
Post by blaise on Jun 4, 2004 14:29:44 GMT -5
I don't know what to make of these insights except to conclude that Schremp is a high-maintenance player, a potential loose cannon. Any GM who selects him will have to weigh the positives and negatives very carefully. Drafting him would appear to be a much bigger gamble than drafting Kastsitsyn. If it worked out it might vault the Habs into serious contention (assuming they also re-sign Kovalev and add a solid defenseman). If it didn't it would be a wasted pick with attendant headaches. Gainey might reasonably conclude that getting a possible upgrade over Ribeiro wouldn't be worth the risk. In that case I'd stick with my original suggestion of going for a defenseman.
|
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Jun 4, 2004 15:12:24 GMT -5
I vote for BPA, as evaluated by Gainey and co. And I don't really care if that's a forward, a D or even a better mascot, if that's the guy who'll have the most effect in 6 years.
After following the draft for many years, I've found it's fairly useless to really try and guess ahead of time who we might take. So many factors come into play - who we have, who we need, what the GM thinks of a kid, what the GM thinks of where hockey will be going, whether we'd rather get a Euro so we don't have to sign him too soon, etc.
Mock drafts have the nasty habit of going by position, which really is the only thing we can figure out with the info we have - depth charts and scouting reports.
As to going high-risk or not, it's a double-edged sword. A guy with less risk is more of a sure thing to make it to the NHL, and you can't always have new spare parts floating around. A good 3d liner you can count on for 10 years is worth quite a bit. Going high-risk means accepting you might get nothing from the draft. Still, I'd go that way, since a team is really defined by its top 5 guys, and we could use some improvement.
So I'd take Schremp if he were available come our pick.
|
|
|
|
Post by M. Beaux-Eaux on Jun 4, 2004 16:44:20 GMT -5
... so special... Schremp hopes combine salvaged repBy Gare Joyce Special to ESPN.com TORONTO -- Players attend the NFL combine and often work their way up into the first round or two with a 4.4 in the 40 or some eye-popping bench press numbers. The NHL's version doesn't work that way. Fact is, almost 100 of the top players eligible for the 2004 NHL draft arrived at the league's three-day session on Thursday like others have over the years -- they were far more worried about falling down the rankings rather than hopeful of moving up. The NHL combine isn't about making a reputation; it's about protecting one. - sports.espn.go.com/nhl/columns/story?id=1812736 |
|
|
|
Post by Habs_fan_in_LA on Jun 4, 2004 17:56:16 GMT -5
I vote for BPA, as evaluated by Gainey and co. And I don't really care if that's a forward, a D or even a better mascot, if that's the guy who'll have the most effect in 6 years. After following the draft for many years, I've found it's fairly useless to really try and guess ahead of time who we might take. So many factors come into play - who we have, who we need, what the GM thinks of a kid, what the GM thinks of where hockey will be going, whether we'd rather get a Euro so we don't have to sign him too soon, etc. Mock drafts have the nasty habit of going by position, which really is the only thing we can figure out with the info we have - depth charts and scouting reports. As to going high-risk or not, it's a double-edged sword. A guy with less risk is more of a sure thing to make it to the NHL, and you can't always have new spare parts floating around. A good 3d liner you can count on for 10 years is worth quite a bit. Going high-risk means accepting you might get nothing from the draft. Still, I'd go that way, since a team is really defined by its top 5 guys, and we could use some improvement. So I'd take Schremp if he were available come our pick. I agree with you on this one PTH. If Schremp is available, we take him. This is a shallow draft, and after 17 players we are looking at possible third liners. We are deep in third liners and don't need another potential one. We could take a gamble on a possible star but likely bust. If he bombs out we wasted a late first round pick but it was only worth a potential third liner. If he sits until Gainey says so and learns from Dougie Jarvis how two way play and teamwork is what it takes to get to the next level, we might have a winner. He and his potential could always be traded to another team willing to take a headcase with great potential. It would be fun to see him try to push Gainey around and get put in his place. |
|
|
|
Post by Cranky on Jun 6, 2004 9:56:33 GMT -5
I read the last article posted on Schremp and I can say that I am definetly not impressed. Sounds to much like another Begal Daigle to me.
Anywho....
Others will pick him WAY before Gainey can waste his pick on him.
Another thing I like to add. These kids may look good out there at the juniour level and the entire world is ready to feed their ego's. But it means nothing and less then nothing at the NHL level. They have lts of time to pull those fancy moves but every step up also means about half the time left. Where one has 3, 4, 5 seconds to make a move, it's down to 2 or 3 seconds at the AHL level and down to nothing by the time you team hits the NHL playoffs.
That is one of the reasons I don't think that Ribeiro will amount to a playoff performer and that is why many of the kids who score millions of goals in juniors do not amount to anything in the NHL. To be a great NHL scorer you need to be able to react and score rather then think.
I think it was Lafleur who said that "I don't know what I am going to do next".
|
|
|
|
Post by Forum Ghost on Jun 6, 2004 12:29:45 GMT -5
I think it was Lafleur who said that "I don't know what I am going to do next". That's true. Lafleur was the quintessential "natural talent." He's always said that he played his worst when he had to think. Larry Robinson once said that anytime Bowman wanted to go over the PP in practice, Guy would be the first guy to mess it up. The best thing to do was to "let him go." I also agree with your assessment of Ribeiro. He had a great season and all that, but I have this hunch that he won't be able to be a solid playoff contributer. It's premature for me to say this, since Ribs has only participated in the NHL playoffs once, but to compare, I saw a lot more drive and determination from Ryder than I did from Ribs. * Anyhow, getting back on topic. Yes, Schremp's rap sheet looks very scary indeed. I know that he has the talent, but to succeed in the NHL you also need to be sound between the ears and Schremp, is not. But if it's a centre that we covet, how about big Travis Zajac? 6'3" 205 lbs... he can score and is very competitive... he's creative, has great hands and does the little things that win hockey games... his defensive game is sound and will only get better in a solid U.S. college program next year. The league he played in last year isn't a very physical one, so the only question mark is how he's going to handle the rough stuff. Scouts like his skill and intensity, but wonder what he'll do when the going gets rough. But the only reason scouts don't know is because his league wasn't a tough one. It's not a foregone conclusion that Zajac himself isn't tough. He might not be, but no one really knows because he hasn't been tested like that yet. Also, I wonder what his skating is like? It wasn't mentioned anywhere. Maybe one of you know a bit more about this guy than I do. montreal? BC? |
|
|
|
Post by BadCompany on Jun 7, 2004 8:59:12 GMT -5
Don't know much about Zajac, though I did actually consider him. Briefly. Big, fast, eletrifying. But... he played against much weaker competition than anybody else. Ryan O'Bryne played in the BCHL and his adjustment to NCAA hockey has been slow. Granted, O'Bryne was not as highly thought of as Zajac, and one player does not a trend make, but still...
Also, Savard seems to place a premium on seeing guys in big tournaments, and he places a lot of value on things like the World Junior Championships, and stuff. That could be because during his tenure as Habs GM those were the only times he got to see the top prospects, but it could also be because he wants to see how players do against the elite players of their same age groups. Zajac has never played in any of those tournaments, so he has very little exposure to "top" competition. Course, its entirely possible that free of his GM duties, Savard watched the BCHL extensively, and really likes the 100 and some odd points Zajac put up there, in 60 or so games... But if I was a betting man, I wouldn't be placing any pretty pennies on it...
Zajac is supposed to play NCAA next year, and it will be interesting to see how he fairs against the tougher competition...
|
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Jun 8, 2004 23:29:24 GMT -5
I feel so embarrassed. Zajac played here all year and I never went to one game. So don't ask me what he's like. Of course, even if I had seen him, what do I know? I picked the Lightning to get eliminated in every round.
|
|
